OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] Issue Comment Edited: (OFFICE-3740) 4.8.14.2 ODF 1.2 Requiring <manifest:manifest> manifest:version breaks downlevel and early 1.2 implementations


    [ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-3740?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=31666#action_31666 ] 

Dennis Hamilton edited comment on OFFICE-3740 at 11/11/12 6:32 PM:
-------------------------------------------------------------------

No, I don't think there is a consensus.

Concerning @Svante's comment of 2012-10-26,

There is no requirement (not even a recommendation) anywhere in the ODF specifications (1.0/1.1/1.2/...) that ODF-namespaced elements and attributes that do not satisfy the schema should simply be ignored.  Encountering such an element or attribute is a *big* warning that there is something the document depends on that the implementation is not designed for and to proceed may lead to a seriously-incorrect result.  The only requirement is that a conforming consumer accept conforming documents in accordance with the schema that is understood, after any adjustment for foreign elements.  

I also believe that the foreign element rules have never applied to manifest.xml.  They certainly don't in ODF 1.2, since the only attention to foreign elements is in Part 1 and the schema that applies for Part 1.

It is interesting that there were older (2007) requests for a version on the package so that the changes in the description for digital signatures could be distinguished.  I have agreed that if there is an ODF 1.2-distinct feature that the package (not the document) requires, the attribute is useful.  Having it as a rubber stamp is not.  I don't believe the 2007 request was considered when the attribute was added late in the development of ODF 1.2 Committee Drafts.

PS: With regard to office:version, recall that the attribute was already defined in ODF 1.0/1.1, but its presence was optional.  I'm suggesting that's a better place to start with manifest:version.

      was (Author: orcmid):
    No, I don't think there is a consensus.

Concerning @Svante's comment of 2012-10-26,

There is no requirement (not even a recommendation) anywhere in the ODF specifications (1.0/1.1/1.2/...) that ODF-namespaced elements and attributes that do not satisfy the schema should simply be ignored.  Encountering such an element or attribute is a *big* warning that there is something the document depends on that the implementation is not designed for and to proceed may lead to a seriously-incorrect result.  The only requirement is that a conforming consumer accept conforming documents in accordance with the schema that is understood, after any adjustment for foreign elements.  

I also believe that the foreign element rules have never applied to manifest.xml.  They certainly don't in ODF 1.2, since the only attention to foreign elements is in Part 1 and the schema that applies for Part 1.

It is interesting that there were older (2007) requests for a version on the package so that the changes in the description for digital signatures could be distinguished.  I have agreed that if there is an ODF 1.2-distinct feature that the package (not the document) requires, the attribute is useful.  Having it as a rubber stamp is not.  I don't believe the 2007 request was considered when the attribute was added late in the development of ODF 1.2 Committee Drafts.
  
> 4.8.14.2 ODF 1.2 Requiring <manifest:manifest> manifest:version breaks downlevel and early 1.2 implementations
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OFFICE-3740
>                 URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-3740
>             Project: OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: ODF 1.2
>         Environment: This defect applies to ODF 1.2 Part 3 since Committee Specification 01.
>            Reporter: Dennis Hamilton
>            Assignee: Patrick Durusau
>             Fix For: ODF 1.2 Errata 01
>
>
> In ODF 1.2-3 4.8.14.2, the manifest:version="1.2" attribute is mandatory on <manifest:manifest> elements.  This attribute provision was introduced in ODF 1.2.  There were no manifest:version attributes for the <manifest:manifest> attribute in ODF 1.0 and ODF 1.1.
> The presence of this attribute prevents ODF 1.1 and earlier implementations that expect strict honoring of older <manifest:manifest> schemas from accepting ODF 1.2 documents for potential down-level acceptability.
> In addition, documents identified as ODF 1.2 documents produced before the provision was added to the ODF 1.2 specification will now be declared as non-conforming by document validators.
> The Catch 22 consists of the fact that expecting the attribute will invalidate previous documents that were identified as ODF 1.2 documents and that producing the attribute will cause error messages (at least) in down-level use of documents that may well have no specific dependency on material ODF 1.2 provisions whatsoever. 
> The provision is too brittle and causes more problems without solving very many.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]